IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] question about draft-jjmb-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host

Noah <noah@neo.co.tz> Tue, 04 July 2017 19:58 UTC

Return-Path: <noah@neo.co.tz>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 440A21328AB for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 12:58:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=neo-co-tz.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vJWyqTkrlezs for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 12:58:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22e.google.com (mail-wm0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70498131A21 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 12:58:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id 62so204688430wmw.1 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 04 Jul 2017 12:58:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=neo-co-tz.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=p6TjaHshuS+AMJDlfxBAuMcXPm3WOtaOtxY0GQn5R1E=; b=B7u5RHDv4VJKjWopc6L+MLjUSgFdhQC6wBdDtJtQzC6kSSWv4gDjj4LKRuCFIAQP/w yDqXtaOKtYjQBxWgHKFfTu2nCFCvQeIbabqfiOBmBar9WegFw2yuQXJps1Ux0qA5rSxS f861ekRroylYcRdwU2VNXxNEfF3EcURff6fwD43tAC9tCzH4gtzYHxyG2mJUhqb/Ofmh VA7pMypHR2Fr3CV1GKq5rwGLxkXR8WvSvFZR4T/uHxM6ky2tzgXg6oBNYeIX2yo5eguC Yu4hrWjWIkJnG7wa25iG2Iw4trFsP4KXQxV/0zkDxxWW9j/tNPrL03Fr6HXmAbzBhnaB 3HQg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=p6TjaHshuS+AMJDlfxBAuMcXPm3WOtaOtxY0GQn5R1E=; b=Ryt/edhbNYSBJjtLtr/mf9oYLMNFa8vHQaS/62iBAaGTgDw8OnA6ZZdGobx6ejfFNr NiPajnc4TFtixDmeV41oytP1RhviQdZncK4XHGa9sUypSLrZ22Iyok5vABJQXKibQpn5 nCOaXn13lUdgbAV6HWUmK67YDG5YFhMQaoSYHtPsgWiW/4tcC7bRvi+Kms3V3x+xA6KC pjVybEaBQkN5YpgVTYKb7ccC5SwmUGxTjndJdR60ujiYwszNo2XNrZZN2CgwI2WGBzS7 YPQa58R16fxQ9hZ7V1V5zm5C3geAohYRVWOBOD2unx/FhXRrWJlXeBuL1Fat4lFz5mL7 Olbw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw110IkGltYKQZqmVWRVR5NXVnSbqg/iEkJlKOJJpITzmmxQ/7KXqu secKvSnThFD9c/ypKARTlEhaFcbXeLDL
X-Received: by 10.28.144.6 with SMTP id s6mr14660083wmd.16.1499198323520; Tue, 04 Jul 2017 12:58:43 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.28.206.4 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 12:58:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [197.250.98.241]
Received: by 10.28.206.4 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 12:58:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <8F04571D-77E4-42FC-A958-AC68C2B6953E@eircom.net>
References: <5348A2C7-D762-470B-9BC9-86B8A09E6369@consulintel.es> <CAEqgTWb68B5qH6rK8aZSDWXf3ko8rwVpLFsSQ4Foq+gAvQHOJA@mail.gmail.com> <8F04571D-77E4-42FC-A958-AC68C2B6953E@eircom.net>
From: Noah <noah@neo.co.tz>
Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2017 22:58:42 +0300
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWb8TPq9ByBxxp7Z1jk+RUTbePM52vKwRJZa5hGAgqFz-Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ross Chandler <ross@eircom.net>
Cc: Jordi Palet Martinez <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1145b55c85a87f0553834f2f"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/vQx1MQDYAAXWILow1haTtD_4vFA>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] question about draft-jjmb-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2017 19:58:47 -0000

On 4 Jul 2017 8:11 p.m., "Ross Chandler" <ross@eircom.net> wrote:



> On 4 Jul 2017, at 16:42, Noah <noah@neo.co.tz> wrote:
>
>
> How about  “Unique IPv6 Prefix Per /End System",   Since a host could
have different interfaces each with a unique Identifier address.

Sticking with the current per-host title is more understandable. I don’t
think the draft seeks to preclude more than one unique prefix per end
system anyway.


Ok then

E.g.  the host may have  multiple network interface types such as WiFi &
3GPP, each connecting to different upstream networks.


Make sense.


Ross

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email